Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

[MileHigh]

You got the wrong schematic MH. The little few turn coil dosnt loop back onto it self. One end go's to the ground rod's,and the other to the neutral side of the load.
When you look at the schematic below,you will see why i said the ground rods are nothing but a resistive path in the neutral side of the circuit. And this is why when Clarence puts in more ground rod's,he gets more power to the load. So now he thinks he is making more power with more ground rod's because more power gets to the load--when in actual fact,he is only reducing the resistance in the neutral side of the circuit when he adds more ground rod's.

Brad:

Thanks for the correction but it doesn't make any difference.  Having the earth ground wire loop a few turns around the secondary high-current captor loop is really nothing more than electronics quackery that doesn't mean anything.  It's just like other parts of the circuit are electronics quackery.  To tell the truth I was aware that there were three or four variations on the CAD-based schematic and I wasn't willing to spend 10 or 15 minutes trying to figure out which one was a perfect match.

Your comments about the number of grounding rods is not necessarily true.  It's just as easily arguable that the number of rods in the setup is never really an issue and it is not a "choke point" for the current flow at all.  You can make a reasonable assumption that it's possible that no matter the number of rods, the conductivity through the ground remains very high.  For example, if the soil resistance between the two sets of grounding rods varies let's say between 0.4 ohms and 0.8 ohms depending on the number of rods, then it's not going to really make any difference at all.  I am making an assumption about the resistance because it never occurred to Clarence to make that measurement, plus he wouldn't know how to make the measurement anyway.  As far as Clarence saying that he got more power to the load, I take that all with a huge grain of salt.  It's possible that it's a "good story" for the narrative and leave it at that.  Even if he did observe more power to the load, it could have been because of another factor, which most likely Clarence would not have been able to distinguish.

There are several caveats here.  Firstly, I don't know what the typical resistance would be between sets of grounding rods.  I am making an assumption that the rods are at least one meter in length, and the lower parts of the rods make it down to very moist or even water-logged soil.  Under those conditions I am making an assumption of less than one ohm, and for all I know it might even be less than 1/10th of an ohm.  I really don't know.  It's a pretty strange measurement to make, so it might be very hard to find that information, I didn't try.  Secondly, I have no idea what kind of soil there is where Clarence is, how wet the soil is, how long his rods are, when did it last rain, and so on and so forth.  I read that they said those variables were discussed among the EF members, but not Clarence himself.  However, we can't forget that two sets of grounding rods in soil are at the EXACT SAME GROUND POTENTIAL, and that means they are as dead as a doornail with respect to "extracting power from the ground."

MileHigh

[cheors]

Probably sure now  that primaries are in phase and secondaries also.
It s the reason why they don't burn in less than one minute
Clarence's explanation :

[MileHigh]

Most of what Clarence has to say as quoted above is quackery.  Consider, "It gets rid of the VOLTAGE COMPONENT in the SECONDARY windings and leaves ONLY the AMPERAGE COMPONENT!" your smoking gun.

I will discuss the issue of the geomagnetic map without looking up a single damn thing.  No matter what your location is respect to the geomagnetic map, the Earth's magnetic field is going to be about the same.  It will be in a magnetic north direction with a certain inclination that is primarily determined by you latitude.  Irregardless of all of this, the Earth's magnetic field is static and unchanging and will not affect the setup in the least bit.  It's just more quackery from Clarence.

So what is the map?  My guess is that it's a map of the permeability of the underlying bedrock and exposed rocks on the surface.  Different types of rock, igneous, sedimentary, etc, may have small differences in permeability.  That will ever so slightly affect the direction of the magnetic field and deflect it a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a degree.  The strength of the magnetic field may change by a tiny tiny fraction.  The map is probably a tool used by geologists to identify the mineral and rock formations that form the layout of the land.  It may help locate valuable mineral deposits.

So for the average Joe Blow experimenter, their compass needle will not in the least be affected by where they are relative to the geomagnetic map.  One more time, worrying about the geomagnetic map is all completely nonsensical.  Has anybody seen any kind of discussion on how to "react accordingly" depending on the geomagnetic map to "match your area" as Clarence says?  It's a farce.

I may be wrong about what a geomagnetic map actually represents, I am not Googling it.  Even if I am wrong, it's still irrelevant, it's quackery, and it's a farce.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Some kudos for some of the contributors on EF.  The user Level made a sensible posting about the dearth of any serious hard data from Clarence and the high buy-in cost for this project almost a day ago now and Clarence hasn't responded.  Also BroMikey was called out for being a rabid believer with no technical acumen.  In fact BroMikey was even running blocking, discouraging people from asking for real data from Clarence.

BroMikey said, "If it works for 5 hours it will work forever" which is complete nonsense when you look at a typical car battery.  That's just a "noise" comment.

And of course, there is one sore thumb in the discussion, and even in the discussion here:  Most of the members are not even discussing the circuit itself, and its merits or lack of merits.  It's actually ridiculous when you think about it.  Instead of discussing the circuit, they discuss wire gages or where to get grounding rods.  That's because people around here that build electronic circuits don't understand enough about electronics to actually discuss the circuit, so they fall back onto what they can discuss, how many rods, the gage of wire, how many turns, and so on.  You are just deceiving yourselves, open up some books and start educating yourselves if you want to do this stuff.

I just posted how the captor is basically a glorified resistor that doesn't even have the proper electrical connections to power the battery charger.  You don't have to be an electronics genius to look at the schematics that I marked up and try to figure it out for yourselves and agree or disagree and discuss it among yourselves.  Even a beginner should be able to make sense of what I said.  Chances are the boys on EF will ignore what I posted, even though I am pretty sure every single one of them will have read the material - and this posting.  You guys have to stop the "Zombie Walk" and open up and try to discuss the circuit itself.  Right now it's the zombies vs. the ostriches.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Off topic comment:

Anybody like me that may suspect the number of guests on EF just for "creative marketing" purposes?

Five hundred and ninety-two guests on a Tuesday morning/afternoon in North America?